2009-02-03

I am glad that this discussion turned to the description of a better BPM. I like your list and believe that such a list should include more BPM functionality, not just modelling.

For example, my list of essential requirements for the ideal process development tool (which is an extension of the modern process modelling tools).

• A BPMN-like modelling notation should use a standard execution semantic which can be validated and which guarantees the adequate interpretation of models by different software for different uses, e.g. for functional testing, performance simulation and execution.

• It should be possible to represent the same business process model with different levels of detail, e.g. a high-level view for a normal user, and a more detail for a business analyst.

• There should be a modelling procedure which guides different stakeholders how to use these different levels.

• Details of the execution of business processes should come from a coherent set of standards, similar to that provided by the W3C for HTML: a) xHTML for structure and content, b) CSS for presentation, c) DOM-based API for dynamic modifications, and d) some other specialized standards.

• Different types of artefact should be easily accessible from a business process development environment.

• It should be easy to plug additional DSL-like tools for the explicit definition of relationships between artefacts into the business process development environment.

• It should be possible to reduce and eventually eliminate the need for the explicit use of intermediate formats such as BPEL and XPDL.

• It should be possible to offer some techniques for improving the comprehensibility of business processes by all stakeholders.

I believe that it is time that BPM progresses from being vendor-centric to become customer-centric. A good example of customer-centricity is the current situation with Web browsers – all vendors of Web browsers want to benchmark their product against the ACID3 test (acid3.acidtests.org) to demonstrate their compliance with standards. Once such a baseline has been established, it becomes easy to compare the performance of products.

I hope that a similar tendency will be established in the BPM field whereby vendors of BPM software will compete in terms of compliance with standards and product performance.

But, as the first step, we need an agreed BPM reference model, of course.Thanks,AS